[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

The ANSWER!!!!!

OK guys, I have found the DEFINITIVE answer to the great spider debate . .
. (drum roll, please).

Now bear with me, because this gets a little complex (like our cars).

Many years ago, I decided "I really ought to read some Philosophy."
Completely at random, I picked up Bertrand Russell as where I would start.
He said two things - number one was "The vast majority of Philosophy,
including my own, is utter rubbish." (That simple statement saved me years
of anguish.), and number two, which I will eventually apply to spiders and
t*rs*ns, was: (more or less) "Sin is geographic in nature. In England, if a
man has two wives, he is a bigamist, and will be regarded as a sinner. In
Araby, however, having two wives is the normal manner of things. The only
difference in the situation is the location. I therefore conclude that sin
is geographic in nature."

So here it is: Spider bites are ALSO geographic in nature! They do bite in
the UK, they might bite in the USA, they don't bite in NZ (did I get that
right?). The cars are the same, the device itself is presumably the same,
the owners (Phil, Dave, Sargent, et. al) are all valued contributors to
this list and can safely be presumed to be intellegent people, so I
therefore conclude that spider bites MUST be geographic in nature - that's
the ONLY difference I see! (Possibly because NZ is "down under" and spiders
work differently when they are upside down?) 

Obviously too much time on my hands this afternoon . . .

Best Regards,

Mike Arman